Re: DDH subdirs, URLs, and URNs
Am 06.07.98 schrieb apharris # burrito.onshore.com ...
Moin Adam!
APH> Marcus, I have a question about the DDH system. As I understood our
APH> last discussion of this issue, the DDH tree was centrally maintained,
Yes.
APH> which means that it's not possible for doc providers to create new
APH> nodes in the tree.
No, Marcus and me have agreed that the package maintainer can add new dirs
and this is very important. A good example is my doc-html-w3 package.
Instead of putting all documents in /web, I#ve created a subdir /web/w3.
We have agreed that dirs should be part of DDH, if more than one package
uses this directory.
APH> However, we did see that it might be nice to have 'application'
APH> groups, which are leaf nodes (meaning can't have child nodes) on the
APH> tree. However, my current Metadata proposal doesn't accomodate this
APH> at all. Unless we could iterpret the top level of my relative URLs
APH> (URNs) as an application group.
?
APH> 1) if the file is located in the doc dir of the package <pkg>, i.e.,
APH> /usr/share/doc/<pkg>/<remaining-path>, and <pkg> is the package
APH> that *supplies* the resource, then it is appropriate to use a
APH> relative URL formulated as "<pkg>/<path>", where <pkg> is the
APH> package name, and where <path> is the location of the document on
APH> the file system relative to /usr/share/doc/<pkg> or /usr/doc/<pkg>,
APH> in that order
No. That#s a bad idea, again. I can#t understand your problems with my
solutions.
APH> Is this enough functionality?
Again, I don#t like this strange solutions.
cu, Marco
--
Uni: Budde@tu-harburg.de Fido: 2:240/5202.15
Mailbox: mbudde@hqsys.antar.com http://www.tu-harburg.de/~semb2204/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: